· Private foundation
Forever Our Rivers Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $24k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $24k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $258k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Conservation Legacy | $120,000 |
| Grand Staircase Escalante Partners | $88,278 |
| Friends of the Verde River | $50,008 |
| Coalitions Collaboratives | $23,750 |
| Crested Butte Land Trust | $8,500 |
| Lincoln Hills Cares | $7,500 |
| Eureka McConnell Science Museum | $3,000 |
| Colorado Canyons Association | $3,000 |
| Grand Valley Audubon Society | $2,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 9% of Forever Our Rivers Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
12 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $34k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
CONSERVATION LEGACY2× · 2023–2024 · $439k · revenue +18%- GSGRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC3× · 2021–2024 · $165k · revenue +18%
- RWRIVERSEDGE WEST3× · 2018–2022 · $115k · revenue +3%
Funded once
- RGRio Grande Headwaters Restoration Projectone grant, 2023 · $8k
- CWCOLORADO WATER TRUSTgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $7k · revenue +427%
CASTING FOR RECOVERYgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +63%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Living rivers promotes river restoration through mobilization by articulating conservation and alternative management strategies to the public. seeking to revive the natural habitat and spirit of rivers by undoing the extensive damage done…
San juan resource conservation and development council, inc.'s mission is to protect and improve the natural, cultural, historic and economic resources of the eight county area of southwest colorado.
Works with farmers and ranchers to address water issues around the state impacting agriculture.
The mission of the Colorado Wildlife Heritage Foundation is to provide a legacy for Colorado through support of environmental stewardship conservation of wildlife and the protection of critical habitat.
Vision: a healthy and resilient big thompson watershed benefitting fish, wildlife, and the people itserves through collaborative efforts for current and future generations. mission: working with others to take action that protects and…
Promote wildlife habitat
The wood river land trust's mission is to protect and sustain the treasured landscapes and life-giving waters of the wood river valley and to inspire love for this special place for generations to come.
The Friends of Mount Evans & Lost Creek Wilderness (FOMELC) is a 501(c)3 charitable organization founded in November 2005. FOMELC is a 100% volunteer non-profit organization. We offer volunteer opportunities for all ages, physical…
To leverage education, technology, and innovative solutions to improve river health.
Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.
CSERC protects water, wildlife, and wild places of the Northern Yosemite region.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Colorado Canyons Association and the most unlike its peers is The Institute for Environmental Solutions. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
22 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 22 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds CONSERVATION LEGACY ↗
- Who funds GRAND STAIRCASE - ESCALANTE PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE VERDE RIVER ↗
- Who funds RIVERSEDGE WEST ↗
- Who funds Gila Watershed Partnership of Arizona ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN HILLS CARES ↗
- Who funds MESA COUNTY LAND CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO CANYONS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds CRESTED BUTTE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds COLORADO WATER TRUST ↗
- Who funds San Juan Citizens Alliance ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF YOUTH AND NATURE ↗
- Who funds EUREKA MCCONNELL SCIENCE MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds CASTING FOR RECOVERY ↗
- Who funds NFRIA-WSERC CONSERVATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds HIGH COUNTRY CONSERVATION ADVOCATES ↗
- Who funds ROARING FORK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds OREGON WILDLIFE HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GRAND VALLEY AUDUBON SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds PURGATOIRE WATERSHED PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds Colorado Riverfront Foundation Inc ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Western Colorado Community Foundation Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Western Conservation Foundation · National Forest Foundation · Walton Family Foundation Inc · Colorado Watershed Assembly · Gates Family Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Xcel Energy Foundation · Conservation Lands Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Forever Our Rivers Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Oregon Wildlife Heritage Foundation — 16% of income from government
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.